Rudolf Steiner Archive & e.Lib Document

Mission of Spiritual Science and of Its Building at Dornach, Switzerland

The Mission of Spiritual

Science and of

its Building at Dornach

I F I try to put forward this evening
something about so-called spiritual science, about the way in which it
is to be dealt with in the building at Dornach with which you are
acquainted, and about that building itself, it is in no wise my
intention to propagandise or arouse feeling either for Spiritual
Science or for the Building.

I have especially in
view the consideration of certain misunderstandings, which are known to
exist with reference to the aims of the Anthroposophical Society. I
will begin with the way in which a more or less unknown thing is judged
when it makes its appearance anywhere. It is very easy to understand
that anyone unfamiliar with a subject sees in its name something by
means of which he thinks he can understand it. Anthroposophy and the
Anthroposophical Society are names which have become more widely known
than they formerly were, through the building at Dornach.
“Anthroposophy” is by no means a new name. When some years
ago there was a question of giving our cause a name, I thought of one
which had become dear to me because a Professor of Philosophy, Robert
Zimmermann, whose lectures I heard in my youth, called his chief work
Anthroposophy. This was in the eighties of the nineteenth
century. Moreover, the name Anthroposophy takes us still further back
into literature. It was already used in the eighteenth century, indeed,
still earlier. The name, therefore, is an old one; we are applying it
to something new. For us it does not mean, “Knowledge of human
beings.” That would be against the express intention of those who
gave the name. Our science itself leads us to, the conviction that
within the physical human being there lives a spiritual, inner one
— as it were, a second human being.

Whereas that which man
can learn about the universe through his senses and through the
intellect which relies upon sense-observation may be called
“Anthropology,” that which the inner, spiritual human being
can know may be called “Anthroposophy.”

Anthroposophy is
therefore the knowledge of the spiritual human being, or spirit-man,
and that knowledge is not confined to man, but is a knowledge of
everything which the spirit-man can perceive in the spiritual world,
just as physical man observes physical things in the world. Because
this second human being, the inner one, is the spiritual human being,
the knowledge which he acquires may be called “Spiritual
Science.” And this name is even less new than the name
Anthroposophy. That is to say, it is not even unusual, and it would be
a complete misunderstanding if anyone were to think that I, as has been
said, or anyone closely connected with me, had coined the name
“Spiritual Science.” The name is used everywhere where it
is thought possible to attain knowledge which is not merely physical
science, but knowledge of something spiritual. Numbers of our
contemporaries call history a spiritual science, call sociology,
political economy, aesthetics, and the philosophy of religion spiritual
sciences. We use the name, only in a somewhat different sense, that is,
in the sense that spirit is to us something real and actual, whereas
most of those who nowadays speak of history, political economy, etc.,
as spiritual sciences, resolve the spirit into abstract ideas.

I will now also say
something about the development of our Anthroposophical Society,
because errors have been circulated on the subject. For instance, it is
said that our Anthroposophical Society is only a kind of development
out of what is called the “Theosophical Society.” Although
it is true that what we aim at within our Anthroposophical Society
placed itself for a time within the framework of the general
Theosophical Society, yet our Anthroposophical Society must on no
account be confused with the Theosophical Society. And in order to
prevent this, I must bring forward something apparently personal, about
the gradual rise of the Anthroposophical Society.

It was about fifteen
years ago that I was invited by a small circle of people to give
certain lectures on spiritual science. These lectures were afterwards
published under the title, The Mystics of the Renaissance. Up
till then I had, I may say, endeavoured as a solitary thinker to build
up a view of the world which on the one hand fully reckons with the
great, momentous achievements of the physical sciences, and on the
other hand desires to rise to insight into spiritual worlds.

I must expressly lay
stress on the fact that at the time when I was invited to speak to a
small circle in Germany on the subject connected with spiritual science
already mentioned, I did not depend in any way upon the works of the
writer Blavatsky or of Annie Besant, nor did I take them particularly
into consideration. These books, in their way of looking at things,
were but little in keeping with my view of the world. I had at that
time endeavoured, purely out of what I had discovered for myself, to
give some points of view about spiritual worlds. The lectures we're
printed; some of them were very soon translated into English, and that
by a distinguished member of the Theosophical Society, which at that
time was particularly flourishing in England; and from this quarter I
was urged to enter the Theosophical Society. At no time had I any idea,
if the occasion should have presented itself in the Theosophical
Society, of bringing forward anything else but what was built up on the
foundation of my own, independent method of research.

That which now forms the
substance of our Anthroposophical view of the world, as studied in our
circle of members, is not borrowed from the Theosophical Society, but
was represented by me as something entirely independent, and
represented within that Society in consequence of an invitation from
it, until it was there found heretical and turned out; and what had
thus always been an independent part of that Society was further
developed and further built up in the now wholly independent
Anthroposophical Society.

Thus it is an entirely
erroneous conception to confuse in any way that which is living within
the Anthroposophical Society with what is represented by Blavatsky and
Besant. It is true that Blavatsky has in her books put forward
important truths concerning spiritual worlds, but mixed with so much
error that only one who has accurately investigated these matters can
succeed in separating what is important from what is erroneous. Hence
our Anthroposophical movement must claim to be considered wholly
independent. This is not put forward from want of modesty, but merely
in order to place a fact in its objectively right light.

Then came the time when
it became necessary to represent in an artistic, dramatic form that
which our spiritual science, our Anthroposophy, gave in its teachings.
We began doing this in 1909 at Munich. From that time onward to the
year 1913 we tried every year to give artistic expression in dramatic
representations at Munich to that which our investigations lead us to
acknowledge is living in the world as spiritual forces, as spiritual
beings.

These dramatic
performances were at first given in an ordinary theatre. But it soon
became evident that an ordinary theatre cannot be the right framework
for that which, in a certain way, was to enter the spiritual
development of humanity as a new thing-. And thus the necessity arose
for having a building of our own for such representations, and for the
prosecution of our spiritual science generally and the art which
belongs to it; a building which, moreover, in its form of architecture
is an expression of what it is desired to accomplish. At first it was
thought that it would be well to erect such a building in Munich. When
this proved impossible, or, at any rate, extremely difficult, the
possibility arose of our erecting the building at Dornach near
Bâle, on a very beautiful hill, where a large piece of land was
offered us by a Swiss friend, who had this ground at his disposal, and
who has our cause at heart. And thus, through easily comprehensible
circumstances, it has come about that the building has been erected
just in the north-western corner of Switzerland.

And now, before speaking
further about the Dornach building, I should like to deal with the
mission of spiritual science itself. It may be quite easy to understand
that spiritual science or Anthroposophy, in the sense here intended, is
misunderstood. One who has become conversant with this spiritual
science finds it entirely comprehensible that many misunderstandings
should be brought against it; and one who knows the course taken by the
Spiritual development of mankind, will not be surprised at such
misunderstandings. Opinions such as, “It is mere imagination; it
is dreaming,” or perhaps worse, are comprehensible. In the same
way as this spiritual science have, as a rule, those things been
received which have entered the spiritual evolution of mankind for the
first time. Moreover, it may very easily appear as if this spiritual
science resembled certain older views of the universe which are not
exactly popular at the present time. If the objects of spiritual
science or Anthroposophy are looked at merely from the outside, it may
be thought that they resemble those pursued by the Gnostics in the
first Christian centuries. But one who really learns what our spiritual
science is will find that it bears no more resemblance to the Gnosis
than does the natural science of the present day to the natural science
of the eighth or sixth century a.d. True, resemblances may be found between
all possible things, if only a sufficient number of their
distinguishing features be eliminated. It may, for instance, be said,
“This spiritual science, this Anthroposophy, desires to know the
world in a spiritual way. The Gnostics also desired to know the world
in a spiritual way. Consequently spiritual science and the Gnosis are
one and the same.”

In a similar manner may
Anthroposophy be confused, let us say, with alchemy, with the magic of
the Middle Ages. But this is all due to a complete misapprehension, a
complete misunderstanding of the real aims of this spiritual science or
Anthroposophy. In order to gain insight into this matter, it is
necessary to look first at the modern method of thought in natural
science, which for three or four centuries has been developing out of
quite a different method of thought. It is necessary to realise what it
meant for mankind when three or four centuries ago the revolution took
place which may be expressed in the words: up to that time everyone,
learned and ignorant alike, believed that the earth stood still in the
midst of the universe, and that the sun and stars revolved round the
earth. It may be said that in consequence of what Copernicus, Galileo,
and others taught at that time, the ground under men's feet was made
movable. Now, when the movement of the earth is looked upon as a matter
of course, there is no feeling left of the surprising effect produced
upon humanity at large by this and everything connected with it.

Now what natural science
then sought to do for the interpretation and explanation of the
mysteries of nature, spiritual science seeks to do for the spirit and
soul at the present time. In its fundamental nature, spiritual science
desires to be nothing else than something for the life of soul and
spirit similar to what natural science then became for the life of
external nature. One who believes, for instance, that our spiritual
science has something to do with the ancient Gnosis quite ignores the
fact that with the view of the world taken by natural science,
something new entered the mental evolution of mankind, and that as a
result of this new element, spiritual science is to be something
similarly new for the investigation of spiritual worlds.

Now spiritual science,
if it is to do the same for spirit that natural science has dome for
nature must investigate quite differently from the latter. It must find
ways and means of penetrating into the sphere of the spiritual, a
domain which cannot be perceived with outer physical senses, nor
apprehended with the intellect which is limited to the brain.

It is still difficult to
speak intelligibly about the ways and means found by spiritual science
for penetrating into the spiritual sphere, because the spiritual world
is generally considered, from the outset, as something unknown, indeed,
as something which must necessarily remain unknown. Now spiritual
science shows that the perceptive powers which man has in ordinary
life, and which he also uses in ordinary science, are by no means able
to penetrate into the spiritual world. In this respect spiritual
science is in full accord with certain branches of natural science.
Only natural science does not know certain faculties in man, which are
latent within him, but capable of being developed.

It is again difficult to
speak of these faculties at the present time, for the reason that they
are, far and wide, confused with all manner of diseased phenomena in
man. For instance, there is much talk nowadays of the possibility of
man's acquiring certain abnormal faculties, and the natural scientist
thereupon declares that it is true that they may be acquired, but they
are only due to the fact that the otherwise normal nervous system and
brain have become abnormal and diseased. In every case in which the
investigator in natural science is correct in making such a statement,
the spiritual investigator at once acknowledges it. But the aim of
spiritual science should not be confused with what is often and widely
called “clairvoyance,” in a superficial way. Neither should
spiritual science be confused with that which appears under the name of
spiritualism, etc., etc. The essential thing is this, that this
spiritual science should be distinguished from everything that is in
any way due to diseased human predispositions.

In order to make myself
quite intelligible on this point, I must indicate, if only in a few
words, the manner in which the spiritual investigator institutes his
researches. The method of research in spiritual science is founded on
something which has nothing to do with the soul-forces of man in so
far as they are bound up with his bodily organism. If, for instance, it
is said that spiritual science is founded on what is to be attained
through some form. of asceticism, or on something for which the nervous
system is prepared and stimulated in a certain way, or that it results
from the bringing of spirits into manifestation in an outer, physical
way — all such assertions would be utterly inaccurate. That which
the spiritual investigator has to do to gain the faculty of looking
into the spiritual world, consists exclusively of processes of the
spirit and soul; they have nothing to do with changes in the body, nor
with visions arising from a morbid bodily life.

The spiritual
investigator will be most careful not to let the body have any
influence over that which he spiritually perceives. I mention by the
way that if, for instance, a large number of the adherents of spiritual
science are vegetarians, this is a matter of taste, which in principle
has nothing to do with spiritual methods of research. It has only to do
with a certain manner of making life easier — I would even say,
with a more comfortable regulation of life, since it is easier to work
in a spiritual way if no meat be eaten.

The main point is that
spiritual science, with its methods of research, only begins where
modern natural science leaves off. Humanity is indebted to the view of
the world taken by natural science for what I would call a logic which
educates itself by the facts of nature itself.

An important method of
training has come in, among those who have studied natural science,
with regard to the inner handling of thought. I will now try to make
clear by a comparison the relation of spiritually scientific research
to that of natural science. The mode of thought used by the
investigator in natural science I would compare with the forms of a
statue. The logic developed from the outer facts of nature has
something lifeless in it. When we think logically, we have images in
our conceptions and ideas. But these images are only inner
thought-forms, just as the forms of a statue are forms.

Now the spiritual
investigator sets out from this mode of thinking. In my books, The
Way of Initiation, Initiation and its Results, and The
Gates of Knowledge, directions are to be found as to what must be
done with thinking in order that it may become something entirely
different from what it is in ordinary life and ordinary science. The
spiritual investigator develops his thinking; he makes it undergo a
certain, special discipline. I cannot in this short sketch enter into
details; these are described in the books I have named. When thinking,
when the logic that bears sway in man, is treated in a certain way, the
whole inner life of the soul becomes changed. Something happens which
changes this soul-life into something else, which I will once more make
dear by a comparison.

Imagine that the statue
— this, of course, cannot happen, but let us assume that it could
— imagine that the statue, which previously stood there with its
lifeless form, were suddenly to begin to walk and to become living.
This the statue cannot do; but human thinking, inner logical activity,
can. By means of the soul-exercises undertaken and carried out by the
spiritual investigator, he puts himself into such a state, that there
is within him not only a thought-out logic, but a living logic; logic
itself becomes a living being within him. Thereby he has grasped
something living and bearing sway within him, instead of lifeless
conceptions. He becomes permeated by this living, ruling element. And
when spiritual research assumes the existence of an etheric body,
besides the physical body which is visible to bodily eyes, by this is
meant not something merely imagined, but it is meant that man, by
bringing logical thinking to life within him, becomes conscious of a
second human being within him. This is a matter of experience which may
be arrived at. The experience must be made, in order that the science
of the spiritual human being may arise, just as the outer experiments
of natural science must be made, in order to learn nature's
secrets.

Just as thinking is so
transformed that it no longer leads merely to images, but becomes
inwardly active and alive, so may the will also be developed in a
certain way. The methods by which the will is so treated that we learn
to know it as something different from what it is in ordinary life, are
also to be found described in the above-named books. Through this
development of the will, something of quite a different kind results
from what comes through the development of thinking. If we desire to do
something in ordinary life, if we work, the will, as it were,
penetrates into the limbs. We say, “I will”; we move our
hands; but the will only comes to expression in this movement. In its
real essence it remains unknown. But by using certain exercises, the
will may be released from its connection with the limbs. The will may
be experienced in itself alone. Thinking may be made active, so as to
become something inwardly alive, a kind of etheric body. The will may
be isolated, separated from its connection with the bodily nature, and
then we realise that we have within us a second human being in a far
higher sense than is the case with thinking. Through the development of
the will we become aware that we have a second human being within us,
which has a consciousness of its own. If we work at our will in an
adequate way, something takes place which I can only make clear by
reminding you that in ordinary human life there are two alternating
states, waking life and sleep. In waking life man lives, consciously;
during sleep, consciousness ceases.

Now at first it is a
mere assertion to say that the soul and spirit do not cease to be
conscious between the time of falling asleep and awaking. But they are
no longer directly in the body, they are outside it. The spiritual
investigator succeeds in voluntarily giving his bodily life the same
form that it takes involuntarily when he goes to sleep. He orders his
senses and his ordinary intellect to be still; he achieves this by
developing his will. And it then happens that the same condition is
voluntarily brought about that is usually involuntarily present in
sleep. Yet, on the other hand, what is now brought about is the
complete opposite of the sleep-condition. Whereas during sleep we
become unconscious and know nothing about ourselves and our
surroundings, through developing the will in the manner described we
consciously leave our bodies; we see the body outside ourselves, just
as we usually perceive an external object outside ourselves. Then we
notice that in man there lives a real spectator of his thoughts and
actions. This is no mere image, no merely pictorial expression, but it
is a reality. In our will there lives something which is perpetually
observing us inwardly. It is easy to look upon this inner spectator as
something intended to be taken pictorially; the spiritual investigator
knows it to be a reality, just as the objects of sense are realities.
And if we have these two, the living, moving thought-being, the etheric
human being, and this inner spectator, then we have brought ourselves
into a spiritual world, which is actually experienced, as the physical
world is experienced with the senses. A second human being is found in
man in this way, as oxygen is found in water by the methods of natural
science.

That which is attained
by developed thinking, is not visions, but spiritual sight of
realities; what is attained by a developed will, is not ordinary
soul-experiences, but the discovery of a different consciousness from
the ordinary one. There now act one upon the other, the human being who
is logic in motion, and the other human being who is a higher
consciousness. If we learn to know these two within man, we know that
part of man which exists even when his physical body falls into decay,
when he goes through the gate of death. We learn to know the being in
man which does not act through the outer body, which is of a soul and
spirit nature, which will continue to exist after death, which existed
also before birth, or, let us say, before conception. We learn to know
the eternal essence of man in this way, through having separated it, as
it were, out of the ordinary mortal human being, just as we can
separate oxygen out of water by a chemical process.

All that I have now
brought before you must of course still be looked upon as fantastic at
the present time; in relation to customary ideas, it is as fantastic as
the words of Copernicus seemed, when he said, “It is not the sun
which revolves round the earth, but the earth revolves round the
sun.” Nevertheless, what appears so fantastic is really only
something unaccustomed. It is not the case that something invented or
dreamed has been related in what has just been set forth, but the point
is that the spiritual is actually experienced as a fact by means of
inward processes. The spiritual investigator is not speaking in a
simple manner of man's nature when he enumerates, “Man consists
of a physical body, etheric body, astral body, etc.,” but he is
showing how that which is human nature, when it is contemplated as a
whole, becomes split up into certain principles of which it is
composed. And if the matter be regarded in accordance with its
fundamental essence, nothing magical or mystical in a bad sense is
meant by these principles of man's being. Spiritual science shows that
man consists of different gradations, different shades of human nature.
And this in a higher sphere is no different from the fact, in a lower
one, that light may be so treated as to appear in seven colours. Just
as light must be split up into seven colours in order that it may be
studied, so must man be divided into his several parts in order that he
may be really studied.

It should not be
expected that what is spiritual can be brought before bodily eyes,
before the senses. It must be experienced inwardly and spiritually. And
to one who will not admit that inward experience, a spiritual
experience, is in any way a fact, anything said by the spiritual
investigator will be but empty skirmishing with words. To one who
learns to know spiritual facts, these are realities in a far higher
sense than are physical facts. If a plant grows, and develops blossom
and fruit, a new plant again develops out of the seed; and when we have
learnt to know the germ, we know that it has the full force of the
plant within it, and that a new plant arises from the g-germ.

What is of the nature of
spirit and soul must be learned from facts belonging to the spirit and
soul; then we know that in the living thought, which is apprehended by
the consciousness that is liberated out of the will, a life-germ has
been discerned, which passes through the gate of death, goes through
the spiritual world after death and afterwards returns again to
earth-life. And just as truly as the plant-seed develops a new plant,
does that which is the kernel of man's being develop a new earth-life.
This new human being can be seen in the present one, for it becomes
inwardly alive.

Natural science has
methods of calculating certain events which will happen in the future.
From the relative positions of the sun and moon it may be calculated
when eclipses of these will occur. It is only necessary to know the
corresponding factors in order to calculate when a certain conjunction
of the stars will take place. In these cases it is necessary to use
mathematics, because we are dealing with external space. The life-germ,
which is inwardly experienced, also contains in a living way the
indication of future earth-lives. Just as future eclipses of the sun
and moon are indicated in the present relations of those bodies, so are
future earth-lives indicated in that which is now alive within us. In
this case we are not dealing with what, according to more ancient
views, is called the transmigration of souls, but with something which
modern spiritual research discovers from the facts of spiritual life,
which are capable of being investigated.

Now certain things must
be carefully kept in view, if we wish to understand the real
foundations of spiritual research. We arrive at leaving the body with
our soul and spirit through treating thought and will in the manner
that has been indicated. We are then outside the body; and just as we
usually have outer things before our eyes, so do we have our own
physical body before us. But the essential thing is that we can
always observe this body. And if it is a case of spiritual
research in the true sense of the words, as it is here meant, that must
never happen which does so in a diseased soul-life. For what is the
characteristic feature of an abnormal or diseased soul-life? If some
one is put into a hypnotic state or a so-called trance, as certain
conditions are called, and speaks out of the subconscious, which is
often denominated a kind of clairvoyance, the essential thing in the
process is that the ordinary consciousness is not present whilst the
changed consciousness is active. The former has been transformed into a
dulled, abnormal consciousness. It will never be possible to say, when
observing an abnormal and unhealthy condition of soul, “The
healthy condition of soul is present at the same time as this,”
for in that case the person would certainly not be unhealthy or
abnormal.

In real spiritual
research the fact is that man arrives at a changed consciousness, but
that as a normal human being he is all the time standing by. The
condition in which the spiritual investigator is, is not developed
from out of ordinary normal soul-life, but by the side of
it, if the condition is the right one. In the case of a genuine
spiritual investigator, he lives, during his researches, outside his
body; but his body continues to work on undisturbed together with all
his normal soul-functions and his ordinary intellect, which remains
completely normal. The man, if he is a true spiritual investigator,
remains a normal human being, in spite of the fact that he has left his
body, together with what he has developed within himself; and one who
cannot himself investigate spiritually, really need not see that the
other is living in a different world. The non-hypnotised person is not
present beside the hypnotised one; the person with a normal soul-life
is not present beside the one who is developing an abnormal soul-life.
But the characteristic feature of spiritual research is that whilst it
is being pursued, the person's normal condition is completely
maintained. Just on this account the spiritual investigator is in a
position accurately to distinguish true spiritual research from that
which appears in any diseased conditions of soul.

Another mistake arises
when it is thought that spiritual research has anything in common with
ordinary spiritualism. By this it is not meant that all manner of facts
may not be discovered through spiritualism, but these belong to natural
science, not to spiritual science, for that which is discovered through
spiritualism is presented to the outer senses, whether by means of
materialisations, or knockings and the like. That which can be
presented to the senses belongs to natural science. That which offers
itself as an object to the spiritual investigator is of a soul and
spirit nature, and cannot be presented externally, for instance, in
space; it must be experienced inwardly.

Through the inner
experience which has been described there is formed a comprehensive
spiritual science, which not only throws light on the being of man and
the passage through repeated earth-lives, but is also enlightening
about the spiritual worlds and spiritual beings which lie behind
nature. Spiritual research is able to enter the world through which man
passes after death. Only it must not be thought that what appear in
ordinary life in a certain sense as abnormal faculties have any special
value in spiritual science. There is much talk nowadays of the
possibility of telepathy. We will not now enter into all the pros and
cons of this matter. People must grow accustomed to many things in the
course of time. Just at the present time serious investigators are
wrestling with the problem of the significance of the divining-rod,
which is now so widely used, and about which one of the most
matter-of-fact investigators is just now making important experiments,
in order to ascertain what influence a person is under who is
successful with the divining-rod. But all this belongs to the
department of finer natural science. In the same way does the fact
belong to this department that thoughts entertained by one person are
able to influence another at a distance. True spiritual research cannot
use such forces for gaining knowledge about the world of soul and
spirit. It is a complete misunderstanding of spiritual science to think
that it looks upon the teaching about telepathy as anything else but a
part of a refined physiology, a refined form of natural science.

The way in which
spiritual science investigates must not be confused with that which
nowadays appears as spiritualism. When spiritual science remembers the
human souls which are passing through a purely spiritual life in a
spiritual world between death and re-birth, spiritual science knows
that those souls are in the spiritual world in a soul-state pure and
simple. Now it is possible for the spirit and soul that is in a human
body to turn to the dead in such a way that a real connection is made
with them. But this turning to the dead must itself be of a purely
spiritual and soul character. Spiritual science shows this. And the
direction of our own soul-life to our beloved dead may acquire deep
significance, even whilst we ourselves are still in the physical world.
It cannot be at variance with any religious belief if, through the view
of the world taken by spiritual science, remembrance of the dead and
active communion with them is cultivated in this way, if spiritual
science stimulates this living together with the dead. In this
connection it must always be borne in mind that the dead person can
only be aware of what we are thinking and feeling for him in our souls
if he desires such a connection with us. This also is shown by
spiritual science. The exercise of any sort of power over the dead is
entirely remote from the intentions of the spiritual investigator. He
knows quite well that the dead are living in a sphere in which the
relations of the will are different from those in the physical world;
and if he were to wish to penetrate into the spiritual world, taking
with him what he is able to develop here within the physical world, it
would seem to him as though — to use a comparison — a
company of people were sitting here and a lion suddenly appeared
through the floor and committed ravages. So would harm result if an
earthly human being were to force his way into the life of the dead in
an unbefitting manner. Therefore there can be no question in spiritual
science of summoning the dead, in the way in which this is attempted in
spiritualism, just because the relations of the living to the dead are
illuminated in a wonderful way by that which spiritual science arouses
within our souls. And since amongst the numerous errors which have been
urged against our spiritual science, one is that it has a connection
with spiritualism with regard to the dead, it is very necessary to
emphasise this misunderstanding sharply. Nothing less than the exact
contrary of the truth is asserted with regard to spiritual
science in this matter.

As already said, I do
not wish to proselytise or arouse feeling for our cause, but only to
mention misunderstandings which I know to be prevalent, and to indicate
in the clearest way possible the relation of spiritual science to these
matters.

Now the question is also
asked — and it is even called an urgent one — what is the
position of spiritual science or Anthroposophy towards the religious
life of man? Its very nature, however, prevents it from interposing
directly in any religious confession, in the sphere of any religious
life. In this connection I can perhaps make myself clear in the
following way. Let us assume that we have to do with natural science.
Because we gain a knowledge of nature, we shall not imagine that we are
able to create something in nature itself. Knowledge of nature does not
create anything in nature. Nor, because we gain knowledge of spiritual
conditions, shall we imagine that we are able to create something in
spiritual facts. We observe spiritual conditions. Spiritual science
endeavours to penetrate behind the mysteries of the spiritual
conditions in the world. Religions are facts in the historical life of
humanity. Spiritual science can of course go so far as to consider the
spiritual phenomena which have appeared as religions in the course of
the world's evolution. But spiritual science can never desire to create
a religion, any more than natural science surrenders itself to the
illusion of being able to create something in nature. Hence the most
various religious confessions will be able to live together in the
profoundest peace, and in complete harmony within the circle of the
view of the world taken by spiritual science, and will be able to
strive together after knowledge of the spiritual — so to strive
that the religious convictions of the individual will not thereby be in
any way injured. Neither need intensity in the exercise of a religious
belief be in any way lessened by what is found in spiritual science.
Rather must it be said that natural science, as it has appeared in
modern times, has very often led people away from a religious
conception of life, from the exercise of true, inner religion. It is an
experience which we have in spiritual science that people who have been
alienated from all religious life by the half-truths of natural science
can be brought back again to that life through spiritual science. No
one need be in any way estranged from his religious life through
spiritual science. For this reason it cannot be said that spiritual
science, as such, is a religious belief. It desires neither to create a
religious belief, nor to change a man in any way with regard to the
religious belief which he holds. Nevertheless it seems as though people
were talking about the religion of the Anthroposophists! In reality
such a thing cannot be said, for all religious beliefs are represented
within the Anthroposophical Society; and no one is prevented by it from
practically exercising his religious belief in the fullest, most
comprehensive and most intense way. It is only that spiritual science
desires to include the whole world in its survey; it desires to survey
historical life, together with the highest spirituality which has
entered historical life. That for this reason it also takes a survey of
religions is absolutely no contradiction of what I have just said. And
thus it comes to pass that the view of the world taken by spiritual
science must in a certain respect deepen a man, even with regard to the
objects of religious life.

But when, for instance,
it happens that spiritual science is accused of not speaking of a
personal God, when it is said that I prefer to speak of the Divinity,
not of God, when it is asserted that what is called “the
divine” in spiritual science is of a similar nature to that which
is so designated in the pantheism of the Monists or Naturalists, this
is all the opposite of the truth. Through the very circumstance that in
spiritual science we are led to real spiritual beings, and to the real
being that man is after death, just because we are led to concrete,
real spiritual beings, we arrive at being able completely to understand
how unreasonable it is to become a pantheist, how repugnant to common
sense to deny personality in God. One arrives, on the contrary, at
seeing that one may speak not only of the personality, but even of a
super-personality of God. The most thorough refutation of pantheism may
be found through spiritual science.

Can it be a subject of
reproach that the spiritual investigator only speaks with deep
reverence when, out of the feelings which his knowledge arouses in him,
he points the way with awe to the divine? How often it is said in the
circle of our friends, “In Him we live, and move, and have our
being.” And one who wishes to comprehend God with one idea, does
not know that all possible ideas cannot comprehend God, because all
ideas are in God. But the recognition of God as a being who has
personality in a much higher sense even than man, in a sense which even
through spiritual science cannot be fully perceived, becomes quite, I
would say, natural to people, specially through Anthroposophy.
Religious conceptions are not made misty, in the pantheistic sense,
through spiritual science, but, in accordance with their nature, become
deepened. If we say that God is revealed in our own hearts and souls,
this is surely the conviction of many religious people; and it is again
and again said in spiritual science that there can be no question in
this of wishing to deify man.

I have often used the
simile that a drop taken out of the sea is water — do I therefore
say that the drop is the sea? If I say that something divine speaks in
the individual human soul, a drop out of the ocean of the infinite
divine, do I therefore say anything which deifies the individual human
soul? Do I say anything which unites nature with in a pantheistic way?
Far from it. And finally, if from certain deeply-seated feelings which
are aroused by spiritual science itself, the name “GOD” is,
in reverential awe, not named but paraphrased, should this be a subject
of blame from the religious point of view? I ask, is not one of the Ten
Commandments, “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God
in vain?” May not spiritual science stimulate to a faithful
fulfilment of this command, if the name of God is not perpetually on
the lips of its followers?

And the name and being
of Christ? It is just of spiritual science that it may be said that it
makes every effort to understand the being of Christ, and that in doing
so it is never at variance with that which is developed, from true
foundations, by any religious denomination. Only, in this very domain,
we meet with something most singular. Some one comes and says he has a
certain conception or feeling about Christ, about Jesus, and we say to
him, “Certainly, we recognise these feelings as wholly justified;
only spiritual science leads to thinking many other things about Christ
as well. It does not deny what you say, it accepts it. Only it must add
much more to it.”

Just because spiritual
science widens the spiritual sight, the eye of the soul, to extend over
the spiritual world, is it necessary not only to recognise in the being
to whom the Christian looks up as his Christ, the one who walked this
earth, but to bring this being into connection with the entire cosmos.
And then, again, much else is the consequence of so doing. But nothing
which results from it takes anything away from the knowledge of Christ,
only something is added to what the religious man, the really Christian
religious man, has to say about the Christ. And when some one attacks
the conception of Christ Jesus held by spiritual science, it always
seems to the spiritual investigator as though some one comes and says,
“I have this or that to say about the Christ; do you believe
it?” “Yes!” we say. “Yes, but you not only
believe that, but more besides!” This he will not allow. He is
not satisfied with our admitting what he advocates, but he forbids us
to declare something still greater and grander about the Christ than he
himself declares.

For can it really be a
heresy when spiritual science, out of its fundamental basis, out of the
observation of that which, as spirit, holds sway through the whole
progress of the earth with regard to human and other evolution, arrives
at saying, “The whole existence of the earth would have no
meaning in the universe if the Mystery of Golgotha had not taken place
within the earthly sphere?” The spiritual investigator must say,
“If any inhabitants of distant worlds could look down upon the
earth and see what it is, they would see no meaning in the whole
evolution of the earth unless Christ had lived, died, and risen again
upon it.” The event of Golgotha gives meaning and purpose to
earth-life for the whole world. If you were to study the results of
spiritual research, you would see that reverence for Christ and
devotion to Him cannot be diminished by such research, but on the
contrary can only be enhanced.

Time presses, and I
cannot enter into many other misunderstandings which have been spread
abroad concerning certain thoughts about the Bible which are said to be
prevalent in circles of Anthroposophists — as they are called,
although the word would be better avoided, and only
“Anthroposophy” used. The point in this case is that a
person may be a very good spiritual investigator without in any way
being able to accept what has, for definite reasons, been said for
those members of our society who wish to know something about the
Gospels or the Bible generally. But if what is said be read with the
context, it will be found that, for instance, I never uttered such
nonsense as that repeated earth-lives could be proved from the Bible by
means of the passage in which Nathanael is spoken of. It has been
asserted that I thought that when the Christ says, “When thou
wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee,” he is referring to an
earlier incarnation, in which he saw Nathanael sitting under the
fig-tree. I can do but one thing when these misunderstandings fly about
the world to-day, I can do but one thing — wonder how such things
have been able to arise at all out of what was really said. They are
just proofs of the manner in which what is really said becomes altered
in the most diverse ways when it is repeated from one to another, and
how the contrary — for in this case it is the contrary that came
out — of what I had said was attributed to me.

I will not now discuss
other misunderstandings, which could easily be refuted. I will only
mention one thing, which may very easily be said, “What do you
think of the fact that nothing about repeated earth-lives is found in
the Bible?” It might be that some one would say that he could not
believe in these repeated earth-lives, for the simple reason that,
according to his convictions, there is a contradiction between the
acceptation of these repeated earth-lives, which, certainly, minds such
as Lessing's, for instance, admitted as true, and what is in the
Bible.

Now repeated earth-lives
will be accepted as a scientific, a spiritually-scientific fact, and
people will learn to think in the following way about the relation to
the Bible of such a fact of spiritual science, which had sooner or
later to be discovered. Would it be thought possible for anyone to say
he did not believe in the existence of America because the Bible does
not mention such a place? Or would it be thought any injury to the
Bible to say, “I think the existence of America is quite in
harmony with my reverence for the Bible, in spite of America's not
being mentioned within its pages”? Is there anything in the Bible
about the truth of the Copernican view of the universe? There have been
people who for this reason have looked upon the Copernican view of the
world as something false and forbidden. Nowadays there is no one really
versed in the culture of his time who could say that he found a
contradiction between the teaching of Copernicus and the Bible —
notwithstanding that the teaching of Copernicus is not in the
Bible.

In the same way it may
be said of the spiritually-scientific fact of repeated earth-lives that
there is no injury done to the cardinal truths of the Bible, merely
because nothing can be found therein about reincarnation,
and because, indeed, much of its contents may be so interpreted as to
seem to contradict this knowledge. These points must only be looked at
from the right point of view. If they are so looked at, it may very
well be remembered how such things change in the course of time. If
some one says he will not admit the truth of repeated earth-lives for
the reason that it contradicts the Bible, I am always reminded that
there was a time when Galileo was treated in a very peculiar,
well-known way, because he had something to say which apparently, but
only apparently, contradicted the Bible. Or we may remember how
Giordano Bruno was treated, because he too had something to say about
which it was asserted that it could not be demonstrated out of the
Bible.

I must, moreover,
remember a priest who became the rector of a university some years ago,
from the theological faculty, and who in his rectorial address, the
subject of which was Galileo, spoke as a Catholic priest somewhat as
follows. He said that times change and with them the way in which
people accept recognised facts. Galileo was in his time treated as we
all know; but now every true Christian sees that through the discovery
of the grandeur of the cosmic system, as it became known through
Galileo, the glory and majesty of God and devotion to Him can only be
increased, not diminished. This was like a priest, it was like a
Christian, indeed, it was perhaps said for the first time in a really
Christian way. And the fine recognition of Galileo was Christian, which
was gained for him from the whole address of this priest.

On the whole I would
say, speaking from the convictions of spiritual science, that the
spiritual scientist must, through his teachings, so think of what
Christianity is, and of what Christ is to the world, as to say,
“How fainthearted are those who think that in consequence of some
discovery in the physical or spiritual domain the greatness which
breathes towards us from the revelation of Christ can be
diminished.” To the spiritual investigator he seems faint-hearted
who thinks that through some fact, even such a weighty one as repeated
earth-lives, some fact which is discovered in the physical or spiritual
sphere, the splendour of the Christ-event and the influence of Christ
can be lessened to the Christian; one who believes this might also
believe that the sun loses power because it does not shine only for
Europe, but for America too.

Whatever further
physical or spiritual facts may be discovered, in any far-distant
future, the great truths of Christianity will outshine them all. This
is discerned by one who approaches the Christ-impulse and the entire
Christian conception of the world with the attitude of spiritual
research. Such a one has no fear. He is not so faint-hearted as to say
that the splendour of Christianity can be diminished by any
investigation. He knows that one who believes that Christianity can be
imperilled by any physical or spiritual research, does not think much
of Christianity.

It is really a question
whether perhaps the numerous misunderstandings which exist with regard
to that for which the Dornach building is an outward sign, an outer
home, can be overcome. About the Dornach building itself I will only
say to-day that it is intended to be nothing else but an artistic
putting into form of that which is aroused in our perceptions and
feelings when we have received into our souls the living essence of
spiritual science or Anthroposophy. Therefore it should not be thought
that the ideas of spiritual science are pictured by means of symbols or
allegories in the forms of the building. Of that there is no question
at all.

If you visit this
building you will find that it has the peculiarity of having nothing at
all mysterious in it, not a single symbol, nothing allegorical or the
like. This has, from the very nature of the building, been kept
entirely remote from it.

It may perhaps be said,
“But it is necessary to know the thoughts belonging to spiritual
science in order to understand what one sees!” This is true, but
it is what the art of the Dornach building has in common with every
other art. Take the Sistine Madonna, the wonderful picture of the
Mother with the Child Jesus. I think that if a person who had never
heard anything about Christianity were to stand before the Sistine
Madonna, it would be necessary to explain to him what it is, for he too
would not be able to understand the subject out of his own feelings.
Thus it is a matter of course that it is necessary to live quite in the
current of spiritual science in order to understand its art, just as it
is necessary to be in the midst of Christianity in order to understand
the Sistine Madonna.

The attempt is not made,
in the Dornach building, to express the ideas of spiritual science
symbolically, but there underlies it this fact of our view of the
world, namely, that spiritual science is something — and this
follows from what I have said here to-day — which takes hold of
man's inner being in such a living, powerful way, that faculties
otherwise dormant in him — artistic faculties as well as others
— are awakened. And as spiritual science is something new —
not a new name for something old, but something really new — just
as present-day natural science is new as compared with the natural
science of the Middle Ages, its art too must be something new and
different from existing works of art. Gothic art came forward as new,
compared with the antique; anyone who is of opinion that only antique
art is of value may despise the Gothic; in the same way may a new style
be abused, which arises out of a new way of feeling.

An accessory building is
found especially bad. Near the building with two domes stands a
heating-house. The attempt has been made to construct a useful building
artistically out of the most modern of materials, concrete. The
concrete was taken into account. And on the other hand everything that
is in the building was taken into account. If anyone explains the form
emblematically, if he sees all kinds of symbols in it, he is just a
dreamer, a visionary, not one who sees what is there. Just as a
nutshell is shaped so as to fit the nut-kernel, so does the artist try,
in what he constructs, to form a shell for what is within it, a shell
as it were in conformity with nature, so that the outer form is the
appropriate covering of what it contains. That is what is attempted.
And one who criticises this building and does not think it beautiful
can be understood, for one must first grow used to these things. But he
might perhaps try to imagine another chimney, as chimneys are now
built, beside our heating-house, a correct, red chimney with its
ordinary surroundings, and he might then compare the two.

It is true we very well
know that what is attempted in the building at Dornach is but a
beginning, and an imperfect beginning, but it is intended as the
beginning of something which is arising out of a new view of the world,
as a new style of architecture. There are also people who said,
“Look, you have made seven columns, seven on each side of the
principal hall. You are a very superstitious society; you believe in
the mystical number seven.”

Well, one who sees seven
colours in the

The Heating HouseClick image for large view

rainbow might also be
thought superstitious. In that case it is really nature, which causes
the fact, which should be thought superstitious. But anyone who talks
about these seven columns should not at first consider the number, but
consider what has been newly attempted in the matter. Elsewhere,
similar columns are placed near each other. The capitals of our columns
are designed to be in continuous development; the second column is
different from the first, the third again different; one capital arises
out of another. This results in an organism, which has inner laws in
the same way as have the seven tones, from the tonic to the leading
note.

It will thus be found
that nowhere have ideas, symbolism or the mysterious been elaborated,
but the endeavour has everywhere been made to develop something
artistic in forms, colours and so forth. We have striven to make the
whole building the right framework for what is to be carried on within
it. Buildings have walls. In walls as they have hitherto been built,
people are accustomed to see something so framed as to shut off space.
Our walls are so covered over with forms from inside that there is no
feeling of space being shut off by the form, but one has the feeling
that the wall is pervious and that one is looking out into the
infinite. The walls are so constructed in their forms that they seem to
efface themselves, and we remain in connection with nature and the
whole world.

In this short account I
have not wished to convince anyone. I wished to do only what I laid
stress on at the beginning; I wish to interest, not to convince. But
one thing I would fain emphasise once more — the way in which
people become conversant with a particular view of the world depends on
their habits of thought. And one who is acquainted with the course
taken by the spiritual evolution of mankind knows that truth has always
had to be developed through obstacles. Only consider how Giordano Bruno
had to come forth before humanity, a humanity which had always believed
that the blue vault of heaven was the limit of space. Giordano Bruno
had to tell people, “There is nothing at all where you see the
blue vault of the sky; you put something there yourselves when you look
at it. Space stretches out into infinity, and infinite worlds are in
the infinite space.” What Giordano Bruno then did for physical
observation, spiritual science has to do for soul and spirit, and for
what is temporal. In regard to soul and spirit there is also a kind of
firmament, on one side birth, or let us say conception, on the other
side, death. But that firmament is actually just as little a reality as
the blue firmament above; merely because people can only see as far as
birth or conception and as far as death with ordinary human faculties
of perception, they think there is a boundary there, as people used to
think the firmament was a boundary. But just as the blue firmament is
no boundary, but infinite worlds exist in infinite space, so must we,
with enlarged faculties, look out beyond the firmament of birth and
death into an infinity of time, and behold in it the development of the
eternal soul throughout successive earth-lives. In the spiritual sphere
things are not different from what they are in the sphere of natural
science. Therefore it may be asked: How is it then that so many
misunderstandings arise from so many quarters about spiritual science?
In this case I must say, if I may treat the matter more or less
personally, that I think the reasons why spiritual science meets with
so much hostility and misunderstanding are partly objective and partly
subjective.

Amongst the objective
reasons I would place this one first and foremost: Spiritual science is
something upon which it is necessary to concentrate one's thoughts
seriously. Long and earnest work is needful in order to understand it,
work which is inseparable from many experiences and even from many
disappointments. But this is in reality the case with every subject of
knowledge. The paths of Anthroposophy cannot be found without such
work. It seems to be the custom to say that for the understanding of a
watch it is necessary to learn how the wheels work together. This
demands some trouble. But it does not seem to be equally customary to
make a similar admission with regard to the universe at large. In this
case difficult, apparently complicated views are not allowed to have
any value, and yet they are only difficult because the subject in hand
is so. Instead of studying spiritual science themselves, people find
fault with it because, judged from their own point of view, it is
difficult.

Then there are
subjective reasons. And these are to be found in what I have already
said. It is difficult for people in general to reconcile ideas which
they have once formed with ideas to which they are unaccustomed. Such
unaccustomed ideas need not even contradict those already entertained,
but need only add something to what has already been thought.

It has always been thus
with truth. What is contradicted are people's habits of thought. And
from this point of view, if the subjective reasons for
misunderstandings about spiritual science are sought, we must say that
the reasons are to be found on the same ground from which the teaching
of Copernicus was rejected by the whole world, when it first appeared.
It was just something new. But truth has to make its own way in the
world, and does so in the end. This may well be felt by one who has at
heart spiritual science, and all that to which it stimulates.

He relies on the
experience that truth always works its way through the smallest
crevices in the rocks of prejudices which have been set up. Perhaps
spiritual science may still be hated now. But one who hates it will, at
the most, only be able to make others hate it with him, people who are
attached to him and swear by what he says. But never yet has a truth
been effaced through having been hated. Truth may at any time be
misunderstood and misinterpreted, but there will always be found those
who know and rightly understand, in the face of those who misconstrue
and misjudge. And even if that which spiritual science has to say in
our time is not now recognised as true, if it is misunderstood and
unappreciated, the time will come for this science also. Truth may be
suppressed, but not destroyed. It must always be born again, however
often it may be suppressed.

For truth is intimately,
deeply and vitally bound up with the human soul, in such a way that one
may be convinced that the human soul and truth belong to one another
like sisters. And even if there are times and places in which
dissension comes about between them, and some misunderstanding arises,
recognition, and mutual love must always reappear between the soul and
truth. For they are sisters, who have a common origin, and must always
be lovingly mindful of their common origin — their origin in the
spirituality which rules throughout the universe, and the discovery of
which is the very task which Anthroposophy sets itself.